THE relationship between the public and the police is, in theory, quite simple.

The public pay the police to help protect their lives, their property and their rights and freedoms by ensuring that laws made by democratically elected parliaments are upheld, and by identifying and putting up for prosecution by their peers, suspected offenders.

The police do not make the laws and are subject to them - like everyone else.. In every other respect they are paid public servants - something they and the public are apt to forget.

Ensuring that they do their job properly and efficiently is the job of police authorities, which are also required to make sure that local communities are consulted about the way they are policed.

Chief constables, however, dictate policy and priorities, which is why police forces throughout Britain are often run on very different lines, and a form of post-code lottery exists.

The chief constable of Durham, for example, will not countenance speed cameras at any price, believing them to be less effective in saving lives than other, generally cheaper, forms of traffic calming.

Our own chief constable, Richard Brunstrom, passionately believes, and implements, the opposite. And the population of North Wales which employs him, is split.

Should the North Wales police authority simply back their chief or should they try to get more dialogue and discussion going?

Two former senior police officers think the members are too soft on Mr Brunstrom - a point the authority vehemently contests, while accepting that in the past they have been far too craven and deferential.

Ironically and with the admirable frankness which characterises him, Mr Brunstrom agrees with the critics, saying he doesn't think authorities generally sufficiently reflect public opinion, and should be a great deal tougher. That a forceful chief constable can, in fact, run rings around members, effectively establishing a fiefdom.

We have seen this happen elsewhere, under the controversial James Anderton in Manchester in the eighties, for example, and it does not always make for a happy force or a happy public.

The fact is that police authorities do not have to protect their chief constables who are normally more than capable of protecting themselves. Subjecting them and their policies and priorities to fierce scrutiny is what their role is, otherwise the whole system fails.

And if authorities are perceived as being too close then it is only right and proper that they are challenged about that too.